COVID-19 Fall Spread

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
Tom Frieden, former CDC Director, was just on the national news (NBC) saying the reason that vaccine delivery is so slow is because the cities and states had too many doses delivered to them and they’re overwhelmed. What kind of nonsense are these people drinking LOL.

On a side note, he just tweeted this crazy infection curve that shows how infectious the new variant is. Yikes.

 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,894
On a side note, he just tweeted this crazy infection curve that shows how infectious the new variant is. Yikes.
Which might explain why some doctors and scientists are pushing to get some immunity to as many people as possible as fast as possible. If 45 million people in the US. have at least partial immunity by the end of January maybe this chart will look different for the USA. If 22 million people who don't get around much have total immunity by then, maybe the chart looks exactly the same.
 

Dress2Jacket

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
86
Location
Marietta
Tom Frieden, former CDC Director, was just on the national news (NBC) saying the reason that vaccine delivery is so slow is because the cities and states had too many doses delivered to them and they’re overwhelmed. What kind of nonsense are these people drinking.

It is completely stupid that the bottleneck to immunization is turning out to be the most easily scalable thing in the whole effort - sticking people with needles. A lack of planning is the only way that happens. This is a case where there is no downside (other than cost) to having a tremendous glut of arm stick capacity. And we screwed it up.
 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
Which might explain why some doctors and scientists are pushing to get some immunity to as many people as possible as fast as possible. If 45 million people in the US. have at least partial immunity by the end of January maybe this chart will look different for the USA. If 22 million people who don't get around much have total immunity by then, maybe the chart looks exactly the same.

If a bunch of young healthy people get it, it won’t matter. If a bunch of older people get it, it’s going to be terrible.

We’ve given 10 million shots in 5 weeks. I doubt we give 35 million more shots in the next 2 weeks. Hope I’m very wrong.

The UK approved the vaccine a week and a half before us and they still have a curve that looks like that. In fact they’ve approved more vaccines than we have and have been doing the 1 dose approach since last year. Sad.
 
Last edited:

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
I'm stumbling across more articles like this one - more and more countries are vaccinating younger people and putting older people at the end of the line. The point for them is to jump start the economy and get things moving again and they are less worried about hospitalizations and deaths. If your main priority is economic and not health, that is certainly a valid approach.

 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
That will be interesting. Half are ticked off about masks, so that going to push some over the edge.

We don’t have any proof yet that vaccines stop the spread. Almost two-thirds of transmission is from asymptomatic people. So the chances of a vaccinated person still spreading it would be normal and not surprising. The Vaccines suppress symptoms, so you don’t get very sick.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,869
Location
North Shore, Chicago
We don’t have any proof yet that vaccines stop the spread. Almost two-thirds of transmission is from asymptomatic people. So the chances of a vaccinated person still spreading it would be normal and not surprising. The Vaccines suppress symptoms, so you don’t get very sick.
No, I don't believe this is accurate. The vaccine kick-starts your immune system to start producing antibodies that attack the virus once it enters your system. Your body overwhelms the virus while the viral load is still low enough that you don't ever become infectious. Your body only begins shedding the virus once the viral load has built to a threshold (same with symtoms). The vaccine is supposed to keep the viral load from ever reaching that threshold.

So, no, a vaccinated person should never have a high enough viral load to become infectious. This is my understanding. The initial studies didn't include viral load in the analysis, but most experts believe the new vaccines suppress the viral load, as well (but not all experts agree).
 
Last edited:

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
No, I don't believe this is accurate. The vaccine kick-starts your immune system to start producing antibodies that attack the virus once it enters your system. Your body overwhelms the virus while the viral load is still low enough that you don't ever become infectious. Your body only begins shedding the virus once the viral load has built to a threshold (same with symtoms). The vaccine is supposed to keep the viral load from ever reaching that threshold.

So, no, a vaccinated person should never have a high enough viral load to become infectious. This is my understanding.

I have never read that anywhere yet. I’m still reading that the vast majority of transmission is from people who have no symptoms. And whether or not spread happens when someone is vaccinated is still unknown.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,894
No, I don't believe this is accurate. The vaccine kick-starts your immune system to start producing antibodies that attack the virus once it enters your system. Your body overwhelms the virus while the viral load is still low enough that you don't ever become infectious. Your body only begins shedding the virus once the viral load has built to a threshold (same with symtoms). The vaccine is supposed to keep the viral load from ever reaching that threshold.

So, no, a vaccinated person should never have a high enough viral load to become infectious. This is my understanding.
If I remember my understanding of some articles about the vaccines, the Moderna vaccine trials did test viral load in the bodies, but the Pfizer trials did not. So, it is possible that the Pfizer vaccine does not keep the viral load in the body down. One of my pet peeves is the current state of "journalism". There were stories posted that took that information and had headlines that the vaccines do not prevent infection. That was not determined in the trials, but it wasn't disproven either. Some of those stories went as far as explaining that even if the vaccinated person does keep the viral load down, if they breath the virus into their mucus membranes, they could still breath and sneeze the virus out as long as it remained living in mucus and mucus membranes. While technically true, I have a very hard time believing that the amount of virus breathed into a person's nose is anywhere equivalent to the amount in an infected person's nose while their entire respiratory system is actively culturing the virus. I guess it makes good scary words to engage a reader and sell more ads.

To some people, not you, who have said that anyone would be crazy to not get the vaccine, I would point out that the trials were conducted extremely quickly and not to the same standards as vaccine trials before. There is zero evidence of any potential long term harm. There can't be any evidence of potential side effects that don't manifest until two years later because the vaccines are less than 1 year old. I myself doubt that there are any, but I could understand an informed person being concerned about the vaccines.
 

MidtownJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,929
If I remember my understanding of some articles about the vaccines, the Moderna vaccine trials did test viral load in the bodies, but the Pfizer trials did not. So, it is possible that the Pfizer vaccine does not keep the viral load in the body down. One of my pet peeves is the current state of "journalism". There were stories posted that took that information and had headlines that the vaccines do not prevent infection. That was not determined in the trials, but it wasn't disproven either. Some of those stories went as far as explaining that even if the vaccinated person does keep the viral load down, if they breath the virus into their mucus membranes, they could still breath and sneeze the virus out as long as it remained living in mucus and mucus membranes. While technically true, I have a very hard time believing that the amount of virus breathed into a person's nose is anywhere equivalent to the amount in an infected person's nose while their entire respiratory system is actively culturing the virus. I guess it makes good scary words to engage a reader and sell more ads.

To some people, not you, who have said that anyone would be crazy to not get the vaccine, I would point out that the trials were conducted extremely quickly and not to the same standards as vaccine trials before. There is zero evidence of any potential long term harm. There can't be any evidence of potential side effects that don't manifest until two years later because the vaccines are less than 1 year old. I myself doubt that there are any, but I could understand an informed person being concerned about the vaccines.
This is such a common issue across so many things now. People have their own sets of "facts" and get them amped up, over and over again, by echo chambers of conformation confirmation. People are so certain that they're right, and that the great evil "other" is out to get them. It is so dangerous to our communities and the common threads that bind us together.

Add in that the science behind these mRNA vaccine types being relatively new and not well understood, and the situation is ripe for issues. People not knowing who to trust, or what to do, because their tribe dictates their choices. Masks and Vaccines and Social Distancing have all become these weird ideological flash points. Bringing me to my point.

There is real cause for investigating the vaccine. Understanding the risk profile of taking it versus the potential upside of protecting yourself and aiding in the herd immunity response for people who medically can't get it. That is the role of doctors though, and responsible press (which is fewer and further between than it used to be). I'll take it as soon as it is available for me, my wife who is expecting a baby in March, will probably want to wait (until it is better understood what the effect of mRNA vaccines are on pregnant woman / their babies while in utero or breast feeding. We'll continue researching it and maintaining social distancing until something changes.

People need the space to decide what to do for themselves, but also need information that is unbiased and accurate to make those choices. We can all do our part in helping to educate ourselves and eachother, but also in choosing to research information in a dispassionate way before sharing it out as fact.
 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
This is such a common issue across so many things now. People have their own sets of "facts" and get them amped up, over and over again, by echo chambers of conformation confirmation. People are so certain that they're right, and that the great evil "other" is out to get them. It is so dangerous to our communities and the common threads that bind us together.

Add in that the science behind these mRNA vaccine types being relatively new and not well understood, and the situation is ripe for issues. People not knowing who to trust, or what to do, because their tribe dictates their choices. Masks and Vaccines and Social Distancing have all become these weird ideological flash points. Bringing me to my point.

There is real cause for investigating the vaccine. Understanding the risk profile of taking it versus the potential upside of protecting yourself and aiding in the herd immunity response for people who medically can't get it. That is the role of doctors though, and responsible press (which is fewer and further between than it used to be). I'll take it as soon as it is available for me, my wife who is expecting a baby in March, will probably want to wait (until it is better understood what the effect of mRNA vaccines are on pregnant woman / their babies while in utero or breast feeding. We'll continue researching it and maintaining social distancing until something changes.

People need the space to decide what to do for themselves, but also need information that is unbiased and accurate to make those choices. We can all do our part in helping to educate ourselves and eachother, but also in choosing to research information in a dispassionate way before sharing it out as fact.

Yep, and further justification for vaccinating elderly people first. Not only are they the vast majority of deaths (currently, 81% of deaths are over the age of 65), but any side effects or complications will be less relevant in the first place due to their remaining expected lifespan. Not trying to be mean, but I'll use my wife's parents as an example. They're both 78, and her dad has COPD, emphysema, circulation issues, heart issues, and so on. He gives 2 ****s about the risk of side effects or long term complications, because he may not live long enough to run into any in the first place. If he were to contract covid, he may not last 2 weeks. Young healthy people in fields like healthcare, fire departments, police, EMTs, teachers, etc. are in the phase 1a and 1b groups. It varies by region, but I think nationally 30%-40% of them are refusing the vaccine. Meanwhile its the polar opposite for the elderly, who are standing in lines for hours and crashing phone lines and websites to get a shot. So you've got all these places with tons of shots left and a short shelf life to do something with them.
 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
Aren‘t decisions left up to each state? I just read where Alabama is providing vaccines to Wave 1 ... which is 75+.

Alabama seems to be following the CDCs main guidance. Most states are moving on to 1b which is the 75+ range. But phase 1a still shows healthcare workers, and 1b shows other essential workers. You'll notice on that page they've delivered 42,000 of their 226,000 doses. Just sad. My guess is they spent a lot of time on healthcare and essential workers and had a hard time getting high uptake.

 

TheStolenT

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
44
Location
I'll never tell
Alabama seems to be following the CDCs main guidance. Most states are moving on to 1b which is the 75+ range. But phase 1a still shows healthcare workers, and 1b shows other essential workers. You'll notice on that page they've delivered 42,000 of their 226,000 doses. Just sad. My guess is they spent a lot of time on healthcare and essential workers and had a hard time getting high uptake.

The biggest problem in Alabama is that all of the first deliveries went to the major medical centers in each city ie. UAB in Birmingham and then all the employees of all the local hospitals have to go downtown to the major medical centers at a given appointment time which is just a logistical nightmare when you are trying to randomly assign people appointment times, people who work hospital shift work schedules who cant just leave or reschedule a shift to drop in. They randomly assigned me a shot time in the middle of an ER shift which delayed me getting the shot by a couple weeks. They insist on keeping a hold of the whole process instead of distributing to each hospital and spreading the load. I work at a community hospital in the ER and I just completed yesterday thankfully, but the bottle neck they have created is leading to the slow roll out. Thankfully some hospitals are getting the moderna vaccine here now straight to the community hospitals which has greatly increased the speed, we basically gave it to the entire ICU staff in an afternoon, but crazy its taken this long.
 

forensicbuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,869
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Alabama seems to be following the CDCs main guidance. Most states are moving on to 1b which is the 75+ range. But phase 1a still shows healthcare workers, and 1b shows other essential workers. You'll notice on that page they've delivered 42,000 of their 226,000 doses. Just sad. My guess is they spent a lot of time on healthcare and essential workers and had a hard time getting high uptake.

So, my dad lives in Alabama (12 miles from the border), and was originally taken to the local hospital (run by Tanner) in Alabama. He was transferred to Tanner in Carrolton. So, does he count as an Alabama or Georgia hospitalization, or both?

Edit: BTW, he came home today.
 

bwelbo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,107
So, my dad lives in Alabama (12 miles from the border), and was originally taken to the local hospital (run by Tanner) in Alabama. He was transferred to Tanner in Carrolton. So, does he count as an Alabama or Georgia hospitalization, or both?

Edit: BTW, he came home today.

GOOD TO HEAR HE IS HOME!

Florida had to fire a data analyst type person because she wanted to count people from other states who tested positive in Florida. If they went home (let’s say they are a resident of NY), were hospitalized, and died, she wanted to count all that against Florida. My understanding is every state is counting their own residents. So he would count as a used bed and towards hospitalization utilization for that Georgia hospital, but he’d count as a positive Covid case and Covid hospitalization under Alabama.
 
Top